Revisiting the Internet Routers’ Buffers Sizing Problem

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56313/jictas.v4i2.457

Keywords:

Bandwidth-Delay Product Formula, Small-Buffers’ Rule, Network-Topology, Traffic Pipes, Minimum Nodal Buffer Capacity

Abstract

The problem of appropriately sizing routers’ buffers has been a research issue which has elicited considerable interests for more than 30 years now. The question that has been so much debated is: How large should these buffers be? Three main buffers’ sizing rules exist in the literature, which are: Bandwidth-Delay Product (BDP), small-buffers’ and the tiny-buffers’ rules. But researchers are largely agreed that, the BDP formula specifies unrealistically large buffers; while the generic utility of the small and tiny buffers’ formulas have been questioned by most researchers. Some researchers have even opined that, deriving a single universal formula for dimensioning the buffers may not be possible: But, the congestion problem of data networks has largely been linked to inappropriately sized buffers. The main objective of this paper is to report the application, in the context of Internetworking Protocol (IP) networks, of a novel formula that was derived in a previously published paper; which can be used to appropriately specify these buffers. Additionally, we argue that, the formula is indeed a unique solution of the buffers’ sizing problem. The justification for this position is premised on the fact that, the formula may specify what we refer to as very-tiny buffers’, in addition to specifying literature’s tiny buffers’ capacities - a clear validation of the widely-held view that, the BDP formula specifies unrealistically large buffers. The reported formula however, has a huge advantage over literature’s tiny and small buffers’ formulas; as, it is ‘application-generic’, unlike literature’s tiny and small buffers’ formulas.

References

. 1.Mckeown, N.: “Introduction to Call for Papers by Program Committee Chair,” 2019 Workshop on Buffer Sizing, Stanford University, Palo Alto CA USA, December 2-3, 2019

. Wang, H.: ”Trade-Off Queuing Delay and Link Utilization for Solving Bufferbloat’” ICT Express, vol. 6, pp. 269-272, 2020

. Shipner, A., Zahavi, E., Rottenstraich, O.: “The Buffer Size Vs Link Bandwidth Trade-off in Lossless Networks,” IEEE Hot Interconnects: Symposium on High Performance Internetworks, Mountain View, CA, August, 2014

. Appenzeller, G., Keslassy, I., Mckeown, N.: “Sizing Router Buffers,” Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM, New York, USA, pp. 281-292, Sept., 2004

. Arun, V., Vijay, S., Thottan, M.: “Perspectives on Router Buffer Sizing: Recent Results and Open Problems,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 34-39, April 2009.

. Beheshti, N., Ganjali, Y., Goal, A., Mckeown, N.: “Obtaining High Throughput in Networks with Tiny Buffers,” In IEEE IWQoS, Netherlands, 2008

. 7.Beheshti, N., Ganjali, Y., Rajaduray, R., Blumenthal, D., Mckeown, N.: “Buffer Sizing in all-optical Packet Switches,” Proceedings OFC/NFOEC, March, 2006.

. Dhamdhere, A., Jiang, H., Dovrolis, C.: “Buffer Sizing for Congested Internet Links,” Proceedings of the Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 2005), Miami, Florida, USA, pp. 1072-1083, March, 2005

. Elsaadany, A., Singhal, M., Ming, L. T.: “Performance Study of Buffering within Switches in Local Area Networks,” Computer Communications (Special Issue on Computer Communications and Networks), pp. 659-667, July 1996

. Enachescu, M., Ganjali, Y., Goal, A., Mckeown, N., Roughgarden, T.: “Routers with Very Small Buffers,” Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM’06, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 1-11, April, 2006

. Enachescu, M., Ganjali, Y., Goal, A., Mckeown, N., Roughgarden, T.: “part 111, Routers with Very Small Buffers,” ACM/SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 83-90, July, 2005

. Wischik, D.: “Fairness, QoS, and Buffer Sizing,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, vol. 36, no. 1, January, 2006

. Prasad, R. S., Dovrolis, C., Thottan, M.: “Router Buffer Sizing Revisited: The Role of Output/Input Capacity Ratio,”Proceedings ACM/SIGCOMM CoNEXT, USA, Dec. 2007

. Extreme Networks, “Congestion Management and Buffering in Data Center Networks: A Solution White Paper,” http://www.ExtremeNetworks.com/contact, 2014 (10-10-2018)

. Eyinagho, M. O., Falaki, S. O.: “Appropriate Buffers’ Sizes for Internet Nodal Devices: A Networks Topologies’- Based Solution,” International Journal of Communication Systems, vol. 33, no. 8, 2020 16. Villamizar, C., Song, C.: “High Performance TCP in ANSNet,” ACM Computer Communications Review, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 45-60, October, 1994

. Raina, G., Towslay, D., Wischik, D.: “Part II: Control Theory for Buffer Sizing,” ACM/SIGCCOMM Computer Communications Review, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 79-82, July 2005

. Beheshti, N., Lapukhov, P., Ganjali, Y.: Buffer Sizing Experiment at Facebook, 2019 Workshop on Buffer Sizing, Stanford University, Palo Alto CA USA, Article No. 9, pp. 1-6, 2019

. Vu-Brugier, G., Stanojevic, R. S., Leith, D. J., Shorten, R. W.: “A Critique of Recently Proposed Buffer Sizing Strategies,” ACM Computer Communications Review, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 43-47, May, 2007

. Zhang, Y., Loguinov, D.: “ABS: Adaptive Buffer Sizing for Heterogeneous Networks,” Journal of Computer Networks, vol. 54, no. 14, pp. 2562-2574, October, 2010

. Summers, J., Barford, P., Greenberg, A., Willinger, W.: “An SLA Perspective on the Router Buffer Sizing Problem,” ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 40-51, March, 2008

. Ganjali, Y., Mckeown, N.: “Update on Buffer Sizing in Internet Routers,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 67-70, October 2006

. Agung Surya Maulana, Budi Yanto, and Fauzi Erwis, “Visualization of Sales Danalyser Data in Dashboard Form Google Data Studio,” JOURNAL OF ICT APLICATIONS AND SYSTEM, vol. 2, no. 2, 2023, doi: 10.56313/jictas.v2i2.270.

Published

2025-12-10

How to Cite

Revisiting the Internet Routers’ Buffers Sizing Problem. (2025). Journal of ICT Aplications and System, 4(2), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.56313/jictas.v4i2.457